Feminism has no theory of the state. It has a theory of power: sexuality is gendered as gender is sexualized. Male and female are created through the erotization of dominance and submission. The man/woman difference and the dominance/submission dynamic define each other. This is the social meaning of sex and the distinctively feminist account of gender inequality.1 Sexual objectification, the central process within this For A. D. and D. K. H. In addition to all those whose help is acknowledged in the first part of this article, "Feminism, Marxism, Method, and the State: An Agenda for Theory," Signs:Journal of Women in Culture and Society 7, no. 3 (Spring 1982): 515-44 (hereafter cited as part 1), my students and colleagues at Yale, Harvard, and Stanford contributed profoundly to the larger project of which both articles are parts. Among them, Sonia E.

No abstract

No abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. IThere is a wrong way of thinking that one has rights, and a wrong way of thinking that one has not any. Simone Weil'No woman had a voice in the design of the legal institutions that rule the social order under which women, as well as men, live.2 Nor was the condition of women taken into account or the interest of women as a sex represented. To Abigail Adams' plea to John Adams to "remember the ladies" in founding the United States, he replied, "We know better than to repeal our Masculine systems."3 Mostly, one senses, women as such were beneath notice at the White. The law librarians at Michigan, especially Barbara Vaccaro and her staff, supported the research persistently and creatively. Rita Rendell supported everything with tremendous resourcefulness and competence. The argument on sexual assault as a form of sex discrimination has been largely shaped in discussions with Andrea Dworkin over the years. More recently it has been focused in collaboration with Elizabeth Shilton and other colleagues at the Women's Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF) in litigation in Canada.Cass Sunstein has thought I should write my argument on abortion for some years and never neglected an opportunity to bring it up. The approach to reproductive control as a sex equality issue has also grown with colleagues at LEAF through a series of cases and legislative testimony. I have tried to footnote distinctive language by others and to highlight arguments focused and formulated by LEAF's submissions. My attempts will necessarily fall short of giving adequate credit to a collective process. Discussions about reproductive rights with Christine Boyle, Christie Jefferson, Helena Orton, and Lynn Smith were particularly formative. This aspect of the work owes the most to Mary Eberts. Her brilliant insights, depth of mind, breadth of knowledge, incisive yet tactful legal formulations, and her courage and tenacity in bearing witness to the truth of women's lives are written all over these pages. LEAF, of course, endorses only the content of its own fact.1. S. WEIL, 1 THE NOTEBOOKS OF SIMONE WEIL 152 (A. Wills trans. 1956). 2. In the United States, many men were also excluded from the official founding process. African American men and women were considered property. Indigenous peoples were to be subdued rather than consulted. Non-property owners were not qualified to participate in most states. C. time.4 The political theory which formed the principled backdrop for the newAmerican republic certainly did not encourage their visibility. Hobbes grounded natural equality in the ability to kill.' Locke argued that whoever did not leave a regime consented to it.6 Rousseau once posited the primitive passions as "foo...

No abstract

Sexuality is to feminism what work is to marxism: that which is most one's own, yet most taken away. Marxist theory argues that society is fundamentally constructed of the relations people form as they do and make things needed to survive humanly. Work is the social process of shaping and transforming the material and social worlds, creating people as social beings as they create value. It is that activity by which people become who they are. Class is its structure, production its consequence, capital its congealed form, and control its issue. Dedicated to the spirit of Shelly Rosaldo in us all. The second part of this article, which will appear in a forthcoming issue of Signs as "Feminism, Marxism, Method, and the State: Toward FeministJurisprudence," applies the critique developed here to theories of the state and to legal materials. Both articles are parts of a longer work in progress. The argument of this essay on the relation between marxism and feminism has not changed since it was first written in 1973, but the argument on feminism itself has. In the intervening years, the manuscript has been widely circulated, in biannual mutations, for criticism. Reflecting on that process, which I hope publication will continue (this is "an agenda for theory"), I find the following people, each in their way, contributed most to its present incarnation:

No abstract

No abstract